I think there are wormholes. I believe wormholes are just one of the many "unexplainable" and "unseen" phenomena that we have yet to find. There are still many, many things in and about this universe that we do not know and may not EVER know. If we advance enough to find these wormholes, we will be ready technologically. Right now, I do not believe we are ready technologically. We might not even be ready as the human race to find anything like this. Minds are still too closed to the idea that we don't know everything, so even though something such as a wormholes or wormholes may be out there, the question is, will we ever be READY to find it?

Oh, I was really hoping you wouldn’t go there, Eric. Now we’re hitting on hard physics. This could really hurt. Let’s see . . . The idea of the wormhole event was first postulated by Albert Einstein with his theory of general relativity. He pressed that in order for all the universe to exist, it had to balance. When asked whether the detonation of a nuclear bomb would result in a global atomic chain reaction, his famous response was really quite simple. "The All-Mighty does not shoot craps." The atom was designed to be split (hence the advent of stars) and everything in the universe works as it should. Using Einstein’s now famous theory, we are able to extrapolate more and more of what the beginning of this universe was like, and what holds for her future. Generally, when a person thinks of a black hole, what comes to mind is something along the lines of my response to "Topic of September 12". In this respect, we’re looking at a passive, motionless, yet incredibly dense object. Already, we have a complex assembly of matter that throws physics for a loop. So little is known about what could happen in such an environment that stating positively what will occur must be regarded as an impossibility. Eric’s argument is that nothing could possibly be so dense that it would be able to form a wormhole. Well, what if we were to compound the issue? Let’s add to this passive lump of heavy matter a rotation AND an electric charge. Make the black hole dynamic! Now we open the book to a wide realm of new possibilities. If you should fall into such a black hole, would you actually hit the singularity? Possibly, but perhaps not. The INTERIOR of a charged, rotating black hole can theoretically "bridge" itself to a corresponding "white hole", the other door I mentioned in my earlier response. Now this white hole can turn up almost anywhere in this, or any other universe. This, my friends, is what we call the wormhole effect. Now, could we travel through a wormhole? Certainly not with today’s technology. The wormhole is a one-way street, an irresistible gravity-well, much like the black hole you entered to get to it. Do you think you’ll be alone in it? Well, if there wasn’t the problem of all that dense matter around you trying to get to the wormhole, consider the funnel- effect on all that hard radiation condensed almost to a liquid form! That’s right—liquid gamma! I don’t think we would last very long. There is, however, the very valid argument that the wormhole is really nothing more than a mathematical solution that, for the time being, works to provide answers to an incalculable universe. The white hole event is actually a reversal of Einstein’s theory of general relativity and implies that, just as a black hole can only absorb matter and energy for all time, a white hole must repel—even more, that a white hole must emit matter and radiation for all time. So far, the wormhole is only a mathematical theory—a possibility, not a fact. It certainly does add up, though. But I think that’s enough.

I belive that the force of time is not all powerfull. Time is equil to space and therefore space can be manipulated. We see this efect in black holes, where it has been theroized that near a black hole time slows. If gravity can effect time then in the same way space can be warped. It is up to man to figure out how to alter or control gravity.

I don't think so. Well, there is no evidence so far. I think it is impossible for something to be so dense that is goes clear through the hypersphere of our universe to the other side.

Well, I believe that we already know (or can find out) everything that we *need* to know. That leaves only those things that we would *like* to know, and that depends on your personal preferences. PS- Eric, I already know the meaning of life (really) if you want to know just say.

Life is what YOU make of it. You see, it’s all in YOUR lap. What would aid most humans is a three part question: Who is out to GET me? Who doesn’t really CARE about me? Who are my real FRIENDS? If we all knew these answers, there would be no holding us back from any endeavor! There ya go! And for now, so long and thanks for all the fish. --Dan

"What is the meaning of life?" - This would help us to do what we need to do.

I have to take the Biblical stance on this one. I don't want this to turn into a religious debate, but that's where this is coming from. There was no other universe before this one. Before anything else came into existence, God existed. And God created everything. He made this universe, and if you believe in parallel universes (I won't argue for or against that one here) He created those at the same time. Now there has been a lot of speculation about the "new Heaven and the new Earth" discussed in Revelation and elsewhere in the Bible. Will the entire universe be wiped out and start over? (Some people relate the Revelation story to what scientists call the "Big Crunch" -- that the universe will eventually collapse on itself and a new one will be created.) I don't necessarily believe that the entire universe will be destroyed, or if it is, I don't know if I believe there will be a new one to take its place. Maybe the "End of the World" will destroy everything, but the "new universe" won't be a material one at all. Who knows?

I don't think there was a previous universe or a will be a future one. I think that the past and future universes were variations on this present universe. Right now, our universe is expanding. Sometime in the distant future, this universe as we know it will not exist. It all has to do with time and the natural (unnatural?) order of things. Of course we could have a completely different future universe that is NOT this one, but then you get into theology and debates over science vs. religion.

This one deals with both philosophy and theology. You see, in the vast scheme of things, I tend look upon all creation as nothing more than a boundless, incalculable pot of broiling activity. Each bubble that forms in this pot and grows will eventually burst or collapse in upon itself. Each of these bubbles is a universe in its own right—exploding to creation—expanding far beyond its limits, unable to collapse and thus joining or interacting with its bordering universes—or not, simply imploding back to a benign annihilation—only to start the whole cycle over again. No, this is not the first universe to take up this particular region of the cosmic realm and by no means will it be the last. And being that we are able to determine this possibility, it is quite imaginable that the human race could outlive this universe of ours, holding ourselves on the sidelines of the coming implosion and awaiting the billions of years for the next explosive creation. Perhaps during the interim, we could even travel across the void of space and time to a neighbor universe and take in the sites while we wait. As for the future, though, who is really to say what shall and shall not be? Nostradamus? Without a true written history, who is to say what has and has not been? Events according to Anglo history? Native American? African American? Polynesian? Oriental? Arabic? Australian Aborigine? Siberian? Afrikaner? Romanian? Jew? Christian? Hindu? Muslim? Buddhist? There are simply too many variables in this grand world of ours. Who is right? Is anyone actually wrong? And if there is a right or wrong answer, can it be proven? I think not. Certainly not in this existence. That’s where we have to rely on faith. In that aspect, though, mankind becomes somewhat belligerent, forcing what he has been raised to believe on those weaker few who were raised differently— But then, that’s another topic. I’ll have to agree with you, Eric. We’ll just have to wait and see what comes. --Dan

Yes, Yes.

I think we are the first universe. The Bible says there will be a new Earth. I do not know whether this means God will also make a new universe... Guess we will have to wait and find out! ;-)

Black Holes are rips in the fabric of space and time. If you fall in, you will exist in a place without space and time. Can you exist in a place without space and time?

I’m afraid this one’ll have to be a bit hefty. First, we must realize exactly what we’re dealing with. At its most passive a black hole is nothing more than a collapsed star, drifting along, perhaps under the influence of another star system. At its most glorious, a black hole may well be considered the central driving force of the most brilliant galaxies in the universe. While no black hole has ever been directly observed, the effect it shows upon its surroundings has. As for density, a black hole will trap (throughout all eternity) any radiation or matter that should approach too near. There is no escape—ever. A curious effect of the black hole event is the fact that a ray of light passing it at a distance of exactly 1.5 times its gravitational radius will be deflected to 45 degrees, placing the ray in a permanent, perfectly circular orbit around the black hole. I find that one kinda fascinating. But what forms a black hole? Where does all this mass begin? This is accomplished with the collapse and formation of stars, beginning with the parent dust cloud, graduating through the formation of a star system where it collects more and more matter, and then continuing on through to its eventual collapse and condensation to become a heavy black dwarf and finally a black hole. But what has it become in reality? When we reach this vast, truly incalculable (and continually growing) density, we start to warp the very laws of physics. Everything around a black hole becomes skewed beyond recognition. There is even a centrifugal force paradox, where the faster you travel around the orbit of a black hole (and as predicted by Albert Einstein around 1915) the more powerfully you are drawn to it. Atomic structure, velocities, dynamics—Nothing adds up. According to Einstein’s general theory of relativity, the three basic dimensions of space and the one dimension of time form a four dimensional space/time and in any space/time, light will always, always, always follow geodesic lines and will therefore always, always, always trace the geometry or shape of space/time . . . but will disappear around a black hole event. . . . Now, welcome to the "bubble universe". Is a black hole a doorway to another world? Yes, it most certainly is. In the very warping of the fabric of this universe of ours, we are effecting the fabric of a neighbor universe in much the same, though opposite, manner. Can we get there from here? I see no possible way, short of being transformed into a beam of light. Not the most pleasing of methods. Perhaps a day will come, though, when we can pass through this portal, if not physically, then with some form of communications media—possibly even the passage of a small parcel, with the ability to "clone" (remember that topic?) a fully sentient human on the far side who could act as a liaison officer for whatever lifeform we may have discovered. Back to you, Eric.

Well, they aren't necessarily either. I read somewhere (I think it was in "The Physics of Star Trek") that the more matter you have, the less densely you have to pack it to get a black hole. And if you used all the matter in the universe, the density you'd need to make a black hole is pretty much the same as the average density of the universe now. So it's entirely possible that the universe itself is a black hole even though we don't think of it as being particularly dense. The same book also explained how black holes could theoretically bend space time enough to create wormholes. It may or may not be possible in our universe, since it requires some funky curves in space time that probably don't exist here. But even if some of our black holes are sitting in wormholes, the wormholes wouldn't make very useful portals precisely because they've got black holes sitting in them, so anything trying to go through the portal would just wind up in the black hole.

We don't know for sure but I think something would have to be infintely dense to be a portal so therefore I think they are just really dense.

When Einstein published his equations of general relativity, he failed to notice that his theory predicted an expanding universe. A Russian mathematician, Alexander Friedmann, found that Einstein had made a schoolboy error in algebra that caused him to overlook a solution to his own equations. In effect, Einstein had divided by zero at one point in his calculations—a no-no in mathematics.

Isaac Asimov’s Book of Facts, Red December Enterprise Corp., ©1979, Random House, ©1997, p. 164.

Since zero has no measurable or otherwise determinable value, it cannot be a divisor. Perhaps it is a permeataor that enters in and spreads throughout the dividend. Becomes of it, indistinguishable from it, the soul of the host. Zero is defined as nothing, but nothing can be nothing. Zero may be like the mirror, which contains nothing, but which defines all that it reflects. Zero is infinitely unknowable, as is infinity. Perhaps zero spreads indivisibly through the invisible membrane of time.

To me it means to take the number and put it in a number of groups (the answer of the problem [like x / 0 = answer]). The number is 0 so there must be an infinite number of groups or if your'e dealing with real items, then it would be zero groups.

To divide by zero means to divide by a number greater than a negative number and less than a positive number. Zero is greater than -.0001 and less than +.0001. So, does zero actually exist, or is it a mathematical theorem? Some people may say that dividing by zero is dividing by nothing, but if that was the case, you would get the same number as dividing by one. Dividing by 0 gives you no answer. Why? Perhaps the easiest answer to this question is the simplest and most complex. To divide by zero means to divide by zero. Period.

To cut something up into no pieces so it therefore becomes un-existent." I think you went a little out of your way on that one, Eric. Dividing by zero (0) is really nothing more than a mathematics stonewall. Multiplying by zero allows for the impossible, something that cannot occur in "real life". All previous equations become void and you get to start over.
((13 x 8) x 0) + 18 - 6 x 5 / 2 = 3
You had started with 13 x 8, but get to start fresh with a zero- base at 18 - 6. But what is zero anyway? There are two popular arguments on the subject. Many say it is the middle of the numeric system, having 1 and -1 bracketing it and the numbers continuing to climb or fall to either infinity. Others suggest it is a physical beginning, stating (without a zero-reference line) you cannot possibly have less than zero of anything. Well, be that as it may, your topic involves dividing by zero, or actually nothing. By transposing the numerals 2 and 0 in the above equation, we come up with the impossible:
((13 x 8) x 2) + 18 - 6 x 5 / 0 = ??
The end of the new problem is met with a stonewall. Dividing by zero is something you can do in real life (simply by ignoring the problem completely), but it cannot occur in math. The problem becomes insoluble. If you start with something to be divided, how can you possibly end up with nothing (unless you’re name just happens to be David Copperfield)? The resulting "pieces" must have a valid quantity. Cutting something up into no pieces to make it un-existent would be tantamount to ignoring an enemy force and hoping it’ll just go away (a new twist on un-divide and un-conquer?). In real life, you can give it a shot and I do wish you luck, but it won’t work on paper.

I doesn't really mean anything. For example, if you have 8 pieces of pizza and 4 people, each person gets 2 pieces. 8/4=2 makes perfect sense. But if you have 8 pieces of pizza and 0 people, how many pieces does each person get? 8/0=0? 8/0=8? 8/0=infinity? It's a nonsensical question.

To cut something up into no pieces so it therefore becomes un-existant.

Yes. Theoretically, time as a dimension has no direction and it is all directions. So, also theoretically, our future already exists, as does our past and our present.

Have we determined, then, that time, as an entity of the universe, actually does exist? Possibly, but even then, why should it’s existence as a dimension imply direction? In this 3-D world we live in, are we directed where we can and cannot go? Surely there are manmade and natural directives, such as fences and boundaries, but we ultimately do remain free to decide our own path in life. So we climb the fence, swim the sea. Now, why would this not be true with Time, looking upon it as being merely an added dimension to the primary three? I do see your argument though, Eric. When we look upon all of history and the many pitfalls that mankind has suffered and miraculously recovered from (both manmade and natural), yes, it would appear that all is pre-planned and that we have merely survived some vital lesson. What happened to the Mayans? Did you know that there are no direct descendants from the Roman Empire? Closer to home, there’s Japan’s Nanjing Massacre during the Sino-Japan War of 1937, the Hitler Holocaust of World War II in the 1940’s, the and MyLai Massacre of 1968, the tragedies at Jonestown in 1978, Waco in ‘93, and Oklahoma City in ‘95. And the uncontrollable tragedies that go on and on, such as the devastating eruptions of Krakatau in 1883 and Mount St Helens in 1980, hurricanes Hugo in 1989 and Andrew in 1992, The Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake of 1995. Could all of these be looked upon as "divine" catastrophic lessons from which we are to learn something? But then, even if all this were true, why should we waste our time learning in a pre-planned existence? What difference would it make? No, there is nothing in life that may be looked upon and "laid out" or "choreographed". Life is what you make of it and, yes, this is Your Time.

If the fourth dimension is time, who is to say that it is our future, but perhaps maybe it is our past. Maybe we are stuck in the 4th dimension and this is why we seem to always strive to make more time to correct our mistakes. We are in this time warp limbo, and I personally am tired of it. Think about how everyone says "history repeats itself" Does this not make one wonder? Just a little bit?

No it doesn't if you see time as branching off with each possibility. If every event causes the universe to split into a universe where every possible choice has occurred then we have an infinite number of futures. None are more likely than the others and so one cannot say that one will happen. Therefore, it is not predettermined only possible.

Yes. Because it is simply going along our space like a book, page by page. But... I do not think the fourth dimension is time and this is one of my arguements against it.

We try to advance because it's in our nature. We assume that we are the creatures with the highest intelligence on this planet and perhaps in this universe. It's as if we want to prove to whatever else may be out there that we are worthy. We want to know more. In order to understand what we discover, we must advance to incorporate that knowledge into our society. We also try to advance because we think we can. We don't know that we can definitely advance, but we try, will try and have tried since the start of mankind. We see the "improvements" that have been made through the centuries and we see that as proof that humans have tried to advance and have succeeded. There is no glass ceiling for advancement. Therefore we will continue to try to advance, or die trying.

I think that there are at least two reasons why we advance.

A) A human may advance to make his / her life more comfortable (Gratification)
B) A human may advance to make someone else's life miserable (Competition)

I think we as humans were created with an unexplainable drive to better ourselves. We our always trying to make things better. Mankind by nature is disatisfied no matter what.

Things appear better in the advanced form. More options and toys to play with. There may be some inner drive in some people.